1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a paint roller, specifically one having a cylinder of greater than normal length and including a support structure for the cylinder.
2. Description of the Prior Art
An impediment to producing paint rollers for covering a significant amount of area in a relatively short time is that the length of cylinders that can be made is constrained by critical support limitations. Uniformly-spaced wheels along the length of the cylinder have not been contemplated by the designers of previous paint rollers. Further, the additional support of a frame supporting both ends of a cylinder has resulted in a solution to the previously unsolved problem that the cover cannot be easily removed from the cylinder. The present hinge and lock nut system is not disclosed or even suggested in the prior art.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 2,684,497, issued Jul. 27, 1954, to S. F. Graham, 2,735,128, issued Feb. 21, 1956, to D. H. Adams, and 4,325,157, issued Apr. 20, 1982, to Peter Balint et al., disclose paint rollers with extensions and paint shields. Belgium Patent 525,941, issued Jul. 6, 1956, to A. Canouet, shows a paint roller with screw thread attachments. However, none of these paint rollers contemplates the instant invention in that the frame is attached to the cylinder on only one side and there is no support structure on the cylinder.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,592,239, issued Jul. 13, 1971, to Cyrus Adler, and 5,263,748, issued on Nov. 23, 1993, to Kenneth J. Carstensen, disclose pipe structures that are hinged and have couplings. Neither of these connections is similar to that of the instant invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,866,257, issued Feb. 18, 1975, to William H. Cansdale, Sr., discloses a paint roller with an adjustable handle and a pivotal socket connecting the frame to the handle. The frame of the Cansdale, Sr. patent does not contain structure that allows it to pivot away from the cylinder for cover removal. Further, the cylinder of this prior patent does not have wheels to support it, in contradistinction to the instant invention.
None of the above inventions and patents, taken either singly or in combination, is seen to describe the instant invention as claimed.